"Wait, I think you and I are having very different conversations." So it would seem. "It's not like Microsoft engineers put that bug in there thinking it woul

"Wait, I think you and I are having very different conversations." So it would seem. "It's not like Microsoft engineers put that bug in there thinking it would be OK." You say that now. But the reason my strident response was triggered was because of what you said in your original post that I replied to: "I don't know what contract these operations have, but it may very well be the case that the user was violating the contract. If Microsoft responded with "don't do that", this may be the case." That is quite absurd on it's face. I replied with how the contract was nothing more or less than the syscall API and there was no margin for negotiation on kernel's part when it comes to corrupting data when a user program calls those APIs in whatever order it pleases. Subsequently, your arguments seem to have become more elaborate with a lot more caveats added. I think it has stopped being fruitful for me to respond at this point.